IRC log of html-techs-tf on 2012-02-20
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 17:01:29 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #html-techs-tf
- 17:01:29 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/02/20-html-techs-tf-irc
- 17:01:39 [Joshue]
- zakim, this will be 9224
- 17:01:39 [Zakim]
- ok, Joshue; I see WAI_HTML TT()11:30AM scheduled to start 31 minutes ago
- 17:01:48 [jnurthen]
- zakim, who is on the phone?
- 17:01:48 [Zakim]
- WAI_HTML TT()11:30AM has not yet started, jnurthen
- 17:01:50 [Zakim]
- On IRC I see RRSAgent, Zakim, Loretta, jnurthen, Joshue, adam
- 17:01:57 [David]
- David has joined #html-techs-tf
- 17:02:00 [marcjohlic]
- marcjohlic has joined #html-techs-tf
- 17:03:27 [jnurthen]
- zakim, who is on the phone?
- 17:03:27 [Zakim]
- WAI_HTML TT()11:30AM has not yet started, jnurthen
- 17:03:29 [Zakim]
- On IRC I see marcjohlic, David, RRSAgent, Zakim, Loretta, jnurthen, Joshue, adam
- 17:05:18 [David_]
- David_ has joined #html-techs-tf
- 17:06:38 [Joshue108]
- Joshue108 has joined #html-techs-tf
- 17:11:02 [Joshue108]
- zakim, this will be 9224
- 17:11:02 [Zakim]
- ok, Joshue108; I see WAI_HTML TT()11:30AM scheduled to start 41 minutes ago
- 17:11:20 [Joshue108]
- rrsagent, make log world
- 17:11:40 [Joshue108]
- meeting: HTML Techniques Task Force
- 17:11:55 [Joshue108]
- chair: Joshue
- 17:12:11 [Joshue108]
- Agenda + Review submitted Techniques
- 17:12:17 [Joshue108]
- scribeNick: James
- 17:12:20 [jnurthen]
- scribeNick: jnurthen
- 17:12:33 [Joshue108]
- zakim, take up item one
- 17:12:33 [Zakim]
- 'one' does not match any agenda item, Joshue108
- 17:12:37 [Joshue108]
- zakim, take up item 1
- 17:12:37 [Zakim]
- agendum 1. "Review submitted Techniques" taken up [from Joshue108]
- 17:12:54 [jnurthen]
- JOC: A couple of techiques submitted
- 17:13:25 [jnurthen]
- JOC: I have started a couple of draft techniques
- 17:14:45 [DavidTodd]
- http://trace.wisc.edu/wcag_wiki/index.php?title=Using_the_html5_required_attribute_to_indicate_that_a_value_is_required_in_an_input_field
- 17:15:09 [jnurthen]
- TOPIC: Review of HTML5 Required Technique (URI above)
- 17:16:13 [jnurthen]
- LGR: Trace wiki - will be there until it stops working
- 17:17:06 [jnurthen]
- LGR: better to use the w3c wiki - but if you have credetntials can use it
- 17:17:17 [jnurthen]
- JOC: be aware that not everyone can edit on the trace wiki
- 17:17:33 [jnurthen]
- DT: Just used this because this is what I had available
- 17:17:47 [jnurthen]
- DT: just let me know where tyo transfer it to
- 17:18:15 [jnurthen]
- JOC: Straightforward technique
- 17:18:37 [Loretta]
- q+
- 17:18:50 [jnurthen]
- DM: Whole user agent support issue
- 17:19:04 [jnurthen]
- DM: There are a whole bunch of different ways of specifying required
- 17:19:42 [jnurthen]
- DM: want a few examples rather than one
- 17:20:26 [jnurthen]
- JN: as long as our exmaples are correct I think that is enough
- 17:20:35 [jnurthen]
- JN: isn it enough to link to the spec?
- 17:21:32 [jnurthen]
- JN: I think we should use best practice
- 17:22:11 [jnurthen]
- LGR: don't want to jst refer to the spec
- 17:22:27 [jnurthen]
- JOC: Both syntaxes are correct
- 17:23:25 [jnurthen]
- Adam: can't be comprehensive - but as developers are used to using values for their attributes may want to add this here
- 17:23:38 [jnurthen]
- JOC: issue of multiple syntaxes is going to come up again
- 17:24:03 [jnurthen]
- Adam: If using required by iteslf should also include the other
- 17:25:19 [jnurthen]
- required is the same as required="true" which equals required="false" which equals required=0
- 17:27:39 [jnurthen]
- Adam: required="required" seems to be used
- 17:27:48 [Loretta]
- Is this the right link? http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#attr-select-required
- 17:28:41 [jnurthen]
- LGR: asking about relationship to aria-required
- 17:29:34 [jnurthen]
- JN: I think if in the same techiqiue we confuse the user aganet support
- 17:30:07 [jnurthen]
- http://john.foliot.ca/required-inputs/
- 17:30:33 [jnurthen]
- ??: Is this AT only or all user agents?
- 17:32:10 [jnurthen]
- JOC: some are pretty accessible
- 17:33:16 [jnurthen]
- LGR: what is is supposed to be doing according to the spec?
- 17:33:44 [jnurthen]
- JOC: in some places the spec defines the user experience but on other places it doesn't
- 17:34:11 [jnurthen]
- LGR: wouldn't expect to define the visual experience but would perhaps expect that if trying to submit it would fail
- 17:35:04 [Joshue108]
- http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/common-input-element-attributes.html#the-required-attribute
- 17:35:54 [jnurthen]
- http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/common-microsyntaxes.html#boolean-attribute
- 17:38:17 [jnurthen]
- JN: what are we going to do for boolean attributes in html5? Both styles or one?
- 17:38:29 [jnurthen]
- JOC: I think we should think about it a little more
- 17:39:08 [David]
- http://www.eramp.com/david/html5/required.html
- 17:39:14 [jnurthen]
- LGR: we should include the link to the correct place in the spec but should also help people in plain english
- 17:40:51 [jnurthen]
- lgr: Is it clear what kind of modifications need doing?
- 17:41:29 [jnurthen]
- DT: have a few notes about UA support, test procedure and ....
- 17:41:41 [jnurthen]
- LGR: needs some work on the test prodedure
- 17:41:59 [jnurthen]
- Adam: we assume that the presence of the required attribute satisfies the success criteria
- 17:42:09 [jnurthen]
- DT: poerhaps take out step number 2
- 17:42:35 [David]
- http://www.eramp.com/david/html5/html5_forms.html
- 17:43:16 [jnurthen]
- JN: depends what success criteria you are trying to meet
- 17:43:58 [jnurthen]
- LGR: This could also be a 3.3.2 techique with user agent notes
- 17:45:27 [Loretta]
- But 3.3.2 would still need a label, in addition.
- 17:48:45 [jnurthen]
- LGR: sounding less like a 3.3.2 candidate even for parialt
- 17:49:02 [jnurthen]
- s/parialt/parital/
- 17:49:20 [jnurthen]
- s/parital/partial/
- 17:49:38 [jnurthen]
- Adam: would like to see more visual discussion
- 17:50:23 [jnurthen]
- JOC: can add CSS to the field.
- 17:50:43 [jnurthen]
- LGR: could do a sufficient technique for this - need to look at H90
- 17:51:04 [Loretta]
- http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG-TECHS/H90.html could be a model for how to write a 3.2.2 technique.
- 17:51:19 [Loretta]
- It would need CSS and label as well as required attribute.
- 17:52:45 [jnurthen]
- LGR: H90 discusses what the group thought was minimally acceptable
- 17:53:42 [Loretta]
- For each indicator of required status that is not provided in text, check that the meaning of the indicator is explained before the form control that uses it.
- 17:54:41 [jnurthen]
- LGR: concern is that * is easy to miss
- 17:55:11 [jnurthen]
- JOC: I like having the text required in the label
- 17:58:45 [jnurthen]
- JN: I think this should be a seperate technique
- 17:58:49 [jnurthen]
- LGR: agree
- 18:07:26 [jnurthen]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 18:07:26 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/02/20-html-techs-tf-minutes.html jnurthen
- 18:07:42 [jnurthen]
- zakim, who is on the call?
- 18:07:43 [Zakim]
- WAI_HTML TT()11:30AM has not yet started, jnurthen
- 18:07:44 [Zakim]
- On IRC I see Joshue108, DavidTodd, marcjohlic, David, RRSAgent, Zakim, Loretta, jnurthen
- 18:13:30 [jnurthen]
- zakim, please part
- 18:13:30 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #html-techs-tf
- 18:13:41 [jnurthen]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 18:13:41 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/02/20-html-techs-tf-minutes.html jnurthen